News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[englanddg]

Did you not see all of the quotes from the Governor and some of the bill sponsors where they are essentially saying this is a direct reaction to Disney’s opposition of the other bill? That would certainly all be admissible in a court case. If they took this action and remained silent perhaps they could argue the 2 are unrelated but they are going out of their way to tell anyone who will listen that this is taking down woke Disney.

I’ve seen the quotes, but I also watched the floor debate. They don’t line up. The court won’t look at three lines on a Twitter post without allowing the other party to submit, or considering, context.

For example, Tate was questioned on the house floor about his use of the term “hornets nest” and “poke the bear”, and he claims he meant that the Disney actions had caused the legislature and other bodies to review the IDs as a whole by drawing attention to them. To “audit”, if you will.

Now, devils advocate hat off for a moment, we all KNOW what this is. I’m not trying to twist it otherwise.

But, that doesn’t necessarily make it illegal or mean a court will find it so.

 

[celluloid]

What red tape does Disney not go through that others go through?

In a nutshell that is what the RCID is. If it did not serve a benefit to Disney, they would not have it if it was not for their benefit. That should not be an argument.
This has been explained a lot so I apologize for continuing it, but in summary various little things from major down to stuff that is a big deal but people do not think is major or juicy. Say a fire suppression system needs to be checked off, the powers that be and RCFD can make that a much bigger priority than the local stations can. Something like fire suppression to be installed in Osceola or Orange County schools is not nearly as efficient as Disney would like it as they have their own for that sort of thing.

Universal and Sea World for example in this case would go about it fairly differently.

 

[zakattack99]

Genuine question. Prefacing so it does not sound snarky. So do you think Disney bypassing much of government's red tape is of no advantage?

I never said that RCID has not been beneficial to Disney, however I am starting to question how beneficial it may actually be. My point is if it was so beneficial why was UNI, Sea World, Bush Gardens not lining up to create something similar or suing to have RCID rescinded years ago if it put their business at such a disadvantage?

 

[Tom P.]

What I said doesn't disagree with what you posted. However, when it states that "congress shall make no laws etc." it is saying exactly what I said., Surely, you aren't naïve enough to think that you can say anything, no matter how harmful against anyone not a part of the government and think the what you quoted will relive you of any consequences of those words. You can protest anything the government says or enacts without fear of reprisal FROM THE GOVERNMENT. And that was the intent of the wording.

The problem here is connecting it directly to Chapek. Chapek said something and shortly state congress to look into and modify the agreement that was granted to WDW. Except for the coincidence that it happened at the same time. He did nothing to directly connect Chapek or even Disney Co. to the words spoken by Chapek. Legally, they are unrelated. Suspicious perhaps, but cannot be proven to have any bearing on the state of Florida's decision to override the old agreement. Chapek isn't even going to be slightly hurt by it because retaliation was not directly happening to Chapek and is something that cannot be proven to be connected anyway.

DeSantis and the members of the legislature have been very open in saying that they are doing to this to Disney in response to their political stances. The lieutenant governor even said that they would consider not doing it if Disney would change their stance. It doesn't get much more clear than that.

 

[celluloid]

I never said that RCID has not been beneficial to Disney, however I am starting to question how beneficial it may actually be. My point is if it was so beneficial why was UNI, Sea World, Bush Gardens not lining up to create something similar or suing to have RCID rescinded years ago if it put their business at such a disadvantage?

Because Disney was first, with a rep and charm/panache and it was all swampland, farms and random bits of Gatorland and Cypress Gardens an hour away. It is that simple if you want to nutshell it.

The amount of advantage is more subjective and can be debated all day. You continued the term "Level The Playing Field." And in a sense, yeah it would for a bunch of random things. Typically those red tape type things.

I don't think it is unfair and the other companies are not storming and saying it is unfair because Disney did it all legally first in a time where it could happen. Almost a bigger idea of what Universal City had in California started back in the day. They know it just is what it is. But it is an advantage to Disney which can be seen as something that levels a bit if removed.

 

[englanddg]

You have been provided the explicit statements, repeatedly now. Comments were also made during the official course of business.

Their speech does not have to be curtailed. A punishment for the speech is enough.

If the District conflicts with the current constitution why didn’t the state just sue again? Why didn’t the Supreme Court catch that the last time?

The punishment is illegal because it is curtailing the speech. The two are connected.

The legal problem is, for a claim of first amendment infringement, TWDC would need to first prove their speech has been curtailed, which means, to prove it is being punished.

As they are not specifically targeted, they would need to articulate and define the harm caused by the recension and how it has hampered their free expression.

They may be asked to explain why the legislated remedy is not sufficient, and, ideally, prove that the State acted outside their authority.

Easy if this was an executive order from the Governor. More difficult when the state legislature has voted.

Point is, them simply saying “I don’t like this, makes me mad” isn’t enough.

 

[lazyboy97o]

In a nutshell that is what the RCID is. If it did not serve a benefit to Disney, they would not have it if it was not for their benefit. That should not be an argument.
This has been explained a lot so I apologize for continuing it, but in summary various little things from major down to stuff that is a big deal but people do not think is major or juicy. Say a fire suppression system needs to be checked off, the powers that be and RCFD can make that a much bigger priority than the local stations can. Something like fire suppression to be installed in Osceola or Orange County schools is not nearly as efficient as Disney would like it as they have their own for that sort of thing.

Universal and Sea World for example in this case would go about it fairly differently.

The District is intentionally known for being particularly onerous, especially when it comes to the building and fire departments.

In Florida, school districts act as their own building authority and are exempt from local zoning. As state law, school districts, counties and even the Reedy Creek Improvement District must follow the Florida Fire Prevention Code, which includes by reference NFPA 13: Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems. These entities can have unique requirements but they must all be more restrictive that the state code. So no, the approach would not be fairly different.

 

[GoofGoof]

I’ve seen the quotes, but I also watched the floor debate. They don’t line up. The court won’t look at three lines on a Twitter post without allowing the other party to submit, or considering, context.

For example, Tate was questioned whether m the house floor about his use of the term “hornets nest” and “poke the bear”, and he claims he meant that the Disney actions had caused the legislature and other bodies to review the IDs as a whole by drawing attention to them. To “audit”, if you will.

Now, devils advocate hat off for a moment, we all KNOW what this is. I’m not trying to twist it otherwise.

But, that doesn’t necessarily make it illegal or mean a court will find it so.

The Governor publicly stated that he directed the legislature to do this to punish Disney. Any lawsuit revolves around him personally calling for this. What some guy says on the house floor is largely irrelevant. I don’t think Disney has any desire to pursue a lawsuit like this, but it’s certainly very likely they could succeed if they did.

 

[englanddg]

DeSantis and the members of the legislature have been very open in saying that they are doing to this to Disney in response to their political stances. The lieutenant governor even said that they would consider not doing it if Disney would change their stance. It doesn't get much more clear than that.

They also have said they have been “looking at this since 2019”, well before the current spat.

Whether or not that is true…? Meh…

 

[celluloid]

The District is intentionally known for being particularly onerous, especially when it comes to the building and fire departments.

In Florida, school districts act as their own building authority and are exempt from local zoning. As state law, school districts, counties and even the Reedy Creek Improvement District must follow the Florida Fire Prevention Code, which includes by reference NFPA 13: Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems. These entities can have unique requirements but they must all be more restrictive that the state code. So no, the approach would not be fairly different.

Yes. Because those who actually physically check will ya know, be only doing things for their own community of RCFD and RCID services. The same way a pothole can get fixed a lot faster at Disney than through the city. It is easier to be above and beyond when you just go take care of it yourself. That is the major benefit after all if one were to summarize. I am not saying the quality is substandard, but can be above and beyond, but way more efficient as the red tape in this case may be waiting for someone to come in and inspect and write off these things. You are semantics again.

 

[englanddg]

The Governor publicly stated that he directed the legislature to do this to punish Disney. Any lawsuit revolves around him personally calling for this. What some guy says on the house floor is largely irrelevant. I don’t think Disney has any desire to pursue a lawsuit like this, but it’s certainly very likely they could succeed if they did.

I suspect the court won't look at that sans context, if at all. However, the court will look at this.

Memo: Amending the call for a Special Session

www.flgov.com

What he says to reporters doesn't carry nearly as much weight as people appear to be assigning it in this situation. If politicians were held to such a standard, we'd see a lot more successful lawsuits.

 

[Tamandua]

They're not trying to hide the fact that they targeted Disney because they didn't do anything to penalize Disney by denying them any rights or benefits that any other company is entitled to in the state. They simply took away a privilege that they had given Disney decades ago when the state legislature considered the arrangement to be good for the state. If the legislature now believes that Disney's control of the district is bad for the state, they have the power to revoke it. There's no legal issue here. Disney was singled out when district was created. Of course they're singled out when it's dissolved.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They're not trying to hide the fact that they targeted Disney because they didn't do anything to penalize Disney by denying them any rights or benefits that any other company is entitled to in the state. They simply took away a privilege that they had given Disney decades ago when the state legislature considered the arrangement to be good for the state. If the legislature now believes that Disney's control of the district is bad for the state, they have the power to revoke it. There's no legal issue here. Disney was singled out when district was created. Of course they're singled out when it's dissolved.

Many of the benefits are offered to other companies, as has been pointed out many times.

 

[celluloid]

They're not trying to hide the fact that they targeted Disney because they didn't do anything to penalize Disney by denying them any rights or benefits that any other company is entitled to in the state. They simply took away a privilege that they had given Disney decades ago when the state legislature considered the arrangement to be good for the state. If the legislature now believes that Disney's control of the district is bad for the state, they have the power to revoke it. There's no legal issue here. Disney was singled out when district was created. Of course they're singled out when it's dissolved.

This sums it up so well. Perfect.

I don't want RCID and the good that comes with it when Disney as at their best, dissolved, but this is it.

 

[peter11435]

They're not trying to hide the fact that they targeted Disney because they didn't do anything to penalize Disney by denying them any rights or benefits that any other company is entitled to in the state. They simply took away a privilege that they had given Disney decades ago when the state legislature considered the arrangement to be good for the state. If the legislature now believes that Disney's control of the district is bad for the state, they have the power to revoke it. There's no legal issue here. Disney was singled out when district was created. Of course they're singled out when it's dissolved.

And how has Disney’s control been bad for the state? Has the district failed to govern properly? Has the district failed to meet any of its requirements?

It doesn’t really matter if any other company has the privilege. If they took it away as a result of a protected action… that’s a problem.

 

[celluloid]

And how has Disney’s control been bad for the state? Has the district failed to govern properly? Has the district failed to meet any of its requirements?

No one said it had to be logical. Just legally done.

I and many others be it safe driving and luck have never had a car accident, and at what I have paid in Insurance I am never going to have to likely have a situation where Insurance will pay out what I have put into it. I have paid and proven beyond that. Yet, I am still legally required to have auto insurance like everyone else.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yes. Because those who actually physically check will ya know, be only doing things for their own community of RCFD and RCID services. The same way a pothole can get fixed a lot faster at Disney than through the city. It is easier to be above and beyond when you just go take care of it yourself. That is the major benefit after all if one were to summarize. I am not saying the quality is substandard, but can be above and beyond, but way more efficient as the red tape in this case may be waiting for someone to come in and inspect and write off these things. You are semantics again.

The County and City inspectors don’t really run at that much of a backlog that it causes meaningful delays. It’s also possible to pay extra for after hours inspections so a project does not have to wait until the next business day. But again, overall, when it comes to getting things built Reedy Creek is considered the biggest pain to deal with compared to other local jurisdictions.

 

[lazyboy97o]

No one said it had to be logical. Just legally done.

I and many others be it safe driving and luck have never had a car accident, and at what I have paid in Insurance I am never going to have to likely have a situation where Insurance will pay out what I have put into it. I have paid and proven beyond that. Yet, I am still legally required to have auto insurance like everyone else.

What requirements apply to everyone else but not Disney?

 

[celluloid]

The County and City inspectors don’t really run at that much of a backlog that it causes meaningful delays. It’s also possible to pay extra for after hours inspections so a project does not have to wait until the next business day. But again, overall, when it comes to getting things built Reedy Creek is considered the biggest pain to deal with compared to other local jurisdictions.

So it would benefit them or others to be like everyone else?

 

[celluloid]

What requirements apply to everyone else but not Disney?

The fact that they get to have such a district that no one else has had since the 60s. You can go down the fact that they have not abused it, and that is fine and I would agree. But it is an exception as pointed out a lot.